6.  The applicant, Ms Nada Kostovska, is a national of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, who was born in 1920 and lives in Skopje.
7.  The applicant and her close family shared a plot of building land with the family of the applicant’s niece and nephew, Mrs M.F.Z. and Mr J.F. Both families have constructed their own family houses on it. A small house and a shed existed on the plot, ownership of which was disputed in the proceedings complained of.
8.  On 9 March 1982, the applicant and her husband instituted civil proceedings against Mrs M.F.Z. and Mr J.F. for determination of the ownership over the house and the shed and for recognition of the usus rights over the land.
9.  On 19 June 1984 the Skopje I Municipality Court (Општински Суд Скопје I) partly upheld the applicant’s and her husband’s claim and awarded them ownership title over the house and the shed and the right to use the land.
10.  On 31 January 1985 the then Skopje District Court (Окружен Суд Скопје) quashed the lower court’s decision and remitted the case for re-examination as the latter had erroneously established the facts and had wrongly applied domestic law.
11.  On 19 May 1988 the Skopje I Municipal Court partly upheld the applicant’s and her husband’s claim.
12.  On 8 July 1989 the Skopje District Court quashed this decision and ordered a retrial.
13.  On 19 November 1991 the Skopje I Municipal Court granted the applicant’s and her husband’s claims.
14.  On 24 September 1992 the Skopje District Court quashed the decision and remitted the case for re-examination.
15.  On 28 May 1993 the Skopje I Municipal Court dismissed the applicant’s and her husband’s civil action.
16.  On 25 November 1993 the Skopje District Court upheld the applicant’s and her husband’s appeal and ordered a retrial.
17.  On 31 March 1994 the Skopje I Municipal Court dismissed the applicant’s and her husband’s claim.
18.  On 28 October 1994 the Skopje District Court upheld the lower court’s decision.
19.  On 27 March 1996 the Supreme Court (Врховен Суд) upheld the applicant’s appeal on points of law (ревизија) and set aside the decisions of the lower courts.
20.  After the death of the applicant’s husband, her daughter and son, Mrs L.M. and Mr V.K., joined the proceedings. The inheritance proceedings concerning the property of the applicant’s husband lasted from 9 October 2001 until 20 December 2001 when the Skopje Court of First Instance declared Mrs L.M. and Mr V.K. heirs.
21.  Following the adoption of the Courts’ Act in 1995 (Закон за судовите), the Skopje I Municipality Court became the Skopje I Court of First Instance (Основен Суд Скопје I) and the Skopje District Court became the Skopje Court of Appeal (Апелационен Суд Скопје).
22.  On 2 July 1997 the Skopje I Court of First Instance dismissed the applicant’s and her children’s claim against Mrs M.F.Z. and Mr J.F. The court established that the applicant had built the house and the shed with the permission of Mrs M.F.Z. and Mr J.F. It was supposed to serve a purpose of a home for their late mother.
23.  On 20 May 1998 the Skopje Court of Appeal upheld the applicant’s and her children’s appeal and quashed the lower court’s decision. It instructed the court below to re-assess the evidence and to obtain new evidence; to examine the parties; to clarify in favour of whom the house and the shed had been built; and to establish when and how the applicant had obtained possession over the property at issue.
24.  After fifteen hearings scheduled and attended by the applicant (except the hearing of 5 February 2001 which was adjourned due to the strike of the court’s staff), on 2 November 2001, the Skopje I Court of First Instance finally dismissed the applicant’s and her children’s claim as ill-founded. The hearings of 23 October and 1 December 2000 were adjourned at the applicant’s request.
25.  On 23 May 2002 the Skopje Court of Appeal upheld the lower court’s decision.
26.  On 8 October 2002 the applicant lodged with the Supreme Court an appeal on points of law (ревизија).
27.  On 9 October 2002 the applicant required the public prosecutor (Јавен Обвинител) to lodge with the Supreme Court a request for the protection of legality (барање за заштита на законитост).
28.  Оn 23 October 2002 the public prosecutor refused her application.
29.  On 19 February 2003 the Supreme Court rejected the appeal on points of law as the value of the claim fell below the statutory threshold.
30.  During the proceedings, four trial judges examined the applicant’s case.